"The Effects of Nuclear Weapons"

In article T_3vc.12682$lL1.4548@fed1read03,
Greg Campbell writes:
Peter Stickney wrote:

Naw - if it's really good, you toss a bit of grass/paper in the air
when you see the flash, measure its displacement when the shock hits
by eye, and do it in your head. While keeping ahead of the crowd, as
in "If you see me running, try to keep up."

(Worked for Ed Teller at Alamagordo. And not only was he faster than
the Data Reduction folks with all their slide rules & Analyzers, he
was more accurate, as well.)

I've read in several books that it was Fermi with the bits of paper. Of
course Teller probably stole the idea and claimed it as his own...

The misattribution was mine.
It was, in fact, Fermi. Teller was the guy in the overcoat, scarf, &
big floppy hat (He sort of looked like The Shadow). He was rather
concerned about the intensity of the flash.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

In article ,
"JASON A. KAATZ" writes:

Top Posting fixed for the edification of those who may follow
"Greg Campbell" wrote in message
news:T_3vc.12682$lL1.4548@fed1read03...
Peter Stickney wrote:

Naw - if it's really good, you toss a bit of grass/paper in the air
when you see the flash, measure its displacement when the shock hits
by eye, and do it in your head. While keeping ahead of the crowd, as
in "If you see me running, try to keep up."

(Worked for Ed Teller at Alamagordo. And not only was he faster than
the Data Reduction folks with all their slide rules & Analyzers, he
was more accurate, as well.)

I've read in several books that it was Fermi with the bits of paper. Of
course Teller probably stole the idea and claimed it as his own...

Dr. Teller would not steal anything. If it were someone's else's idea he
would say so out front. You obviously know nothing about the mans character
and credibility.

I agree. He also had an amazing ability to be unfailingly polite to
any and all. When you spoke with him, you always had his full
attention, and I don't think that anyone ever felt that they were beig
patronized in a converation with him. (A very rare quality, in an
environment filled with spart people with big egos.)


--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

In article ,
(stmx3) writes:
(Peter Stickney) wrote in message

Naw - if it's really good, you toss a bit of grass/paper in the air
when you see the flash, measure its displacement when the shock hits
by eye, and do it in your head. While keeping ahead of the crowd, as
in "If you see me running, try to keep up."

(Worked for Ed Teller at Alamagordo. And not only was he faster than
the Data Reduction folks with all their slide rules & Analyzers, he
was more accurate, as well.)

As others have said...it was Fermi, and problems like this became
known as Fermip problems. See, for example
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionar...rmi%20question

Quite right. My misstatement. I plead Lack of Caffeine.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster

Pat Flannery wrote in message ...
James Nicoll wrote:

Unless you have one like mine, which comes with the Nuclear
Effects circular slide rule in the back pocket.


...and I assume you immediately did what I did; crank it all the way to
the top (20 megatons, IIRC) and set the burst height at zero to see just
how big of a crater you could make. What was that again? Around 400 feet
deep?

Pat

I don't know about the 400 feet, but, IIRC, there was a diagram on the
front showing scaling factors for shallow and deep sub-surface bursts
if cratering is what you fancy.

On 6/1/04 9:47 PM, in article ,
"JASON A. KAATZ" wrote:

Dr. Teller would not steal anything. If it were someone's else's idea he
would say so out front. You obviously know nothing about the mans character
and credibility.

Actually, it seems to be fairly well documented that Teller tried very hard
all his life to deny that Stan Ulam made a significant contribution to the
important principle of staged radiation implosion. It's true that the
evidence points to Teller's contribution being the most essential, i.e.,
using the radiation instead of Ulam's initial suggestion of hydrodynamic
compression, and Teller's idea of a Pu sparkplug. But Ulam did get the
intellectual ball rolling in the first place - until early 1951, the US
h-bomb program was in the doldrums, due to the increasing evidence for the
unfeasibility of the classical Super. In his memoir, Teller said he had
already considered compression when Ulam suggested it. Near the end of his
life, Teller switched gears and tried to give credit to Dick Garwin. The
general consensus of those around at the time was this: Ulam (and Von
Neumann) calculated that the classical Super would radiate energy away at
too fast a rate, and that Teller's design would need large amounts of
tritium, if it would work at all. Rather than acknowledge the unfeasibility
of the design, Teller was miffed at Ulam for what he perceived as sabotage
of his dream and Teller had no patience for those who were unenthusiastic
about the thermonuclear program. History may judge Teller correct about the
wisdom of acquiring the Super before the Russians did, but he was not above
some duplicity.

Barnaby

"Barnaby Finch" wrote in message
...
On 6/1/04 9:47 PM, in article ,
"JASON A. KAATZ" wrote:

History may judge Teller correct about the wisdom of acquiring the Super
before the Russians did,

The current draft of history seems not to do so.

It conforms to contentions made publicly by a former Teller protege, Herbert
York, that following Oppenheimer and the GACs advice would not harmed U.S.
security at all and probably would have enhanced it. In the 1970s York
pointed out that if the U.S. had not gone ahead with testing the hydrogen
bomb,and had just retained it untested as a backup, and simply outfitted
its bomber force with 500 kt fission bombs, the US would have retained
overwhelming dominance over the USSR.

This is because the U.S. had a tremendous advantage in :
1) delivery capability, and
2) uranium enrichment, and
3) the U.S. had a viable bomb concept that it could get ready to test and
leave on the shelf as a contingency

Even if the USSR had gone ahead and perfected the hydrogen bomb on its own,
the U.S. would have picked up the test and could have taken its own design
off the shelf, tested it, and still beaten the USSR into having significant
deployment.

And the most recent evidence shows that without U.S. testing, the USSR would
have come up with the hydrogen bomb much, much later that it did. The 1952
Mike test alerted the USSR to a the existence of an important new design
concept, but they still didn't crack the nut until the second U.S. test
series in 1954 which provided additional stimulus.

but he was not above some duplicity.

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

On 6/15/04 9:14 AM, in article
t, "Carey Sublette"
wrote:

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".

Barnaby

In article ,
Barnaby Finch wrote:

On 6/15/04 9:14 AM, in article
t, "Carey Sublette"
wrote:

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".

Barnaby

Okay, boys, this has damn little to do with space history (which has
never stopped us on s.s.h. before . . .) but, yes, Teller was an
outstanding physicist. He was also very proud and jealous of his own
reputation and standing among the physics community, very
anti-communist, and very status-seeking. His high profile is a result
of many things, not just hawkishness. See, e.g., Rhodes' "The Making of
the Atomic Bomb" and "Dark Sun".

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Columbia Loss FAQ:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

"Herb Schaltegger" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Barnaby Finch wrote:

On 6/15/04 9:14 AM, in article
t, "Carey Sublette"
wrote:

It is interesting reading this accounts of his relationship with
Oppenheimer, and his involvement with the security hearings (see not
only
his Memoirs, but an much earlier article "Seven Hours of
Reminiscences" in
Los Alamos Science, Winter/Spring 1983) in which he entirely omits
mention
of his documented collaboration with the FBI, and which contradicts
his
accounts of his testimony in the hearing.

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of
Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him
to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support
of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".

Barnaby

Okay, boys, this has damn little to do with space history (which has
never stopped us on s.s.h. before . . .) but, yes, Teller was an
outstanding physicist. He was also very proud and jealous of his own
reputation and standing among the physics community, very
anti-communist, and very status-seeking. His high profile is a result
of many things, not just hawkishness. See, e.g., Rhodes' "The Making of
the Atomic Bomb" and "Dark Sun".

Teller's high profile is due to his connection with nuclear weapons, and his
involvement in policy-making (of the hawkish variety), and his relentless
reputation-burnishing ("status seeking" as you say). His contributions to
physics were modest, probably his Ph.D. thesis on the quantum states of the
hydrogen ion was his most important work. Nearly everything after was in
collaboration with another physicist, with Teller as the second author (i.e.
not the primary author), and his scientific productivity (as opposed his
weapon engineering efforts) came to an end in the mid 1940s. He is a minor
figure in twentieth century physics.

This doesn't mean he wasn't an outstanding physicist, just that he made no
outstanding contributions to science.

Similar remarks could be made about Oppenheimer (not a major physicist, and
whose productivity came to an end in the mid 1940s due to involvement with
nuclear weapons and policy making). Oppenheimer's mark on physics is
certainly larger than Teller's for an indirect reason - he was a gifted
professor and taught and inspired many leading physicists of the next
generation.

Barnaby Finch wrote:

It may be the case that Teller will be remembered not as an outstanding
physicist (was he?), but as a government lackey. His betrayal of Oppenheimer
in 1954, while alienating him from the physics community, endeared him to
certain powerful anti-communists in high places, like Strauss. His high
profile seems to stem a great deal from his robust and hawkish support of
dubious nuclear initiatives like Star Wars and Plowshare - read "The
Firecracker Boys".



The book "Teller's War" doesn't paint a very flattering picture of him
either.

Pat